Perle v. Hersh

Jesse Walker | March 10, 2003

Seymour Hersh is one of the best political reporters working today. He is also, according to Defense Policy Board chief Richard Perle, "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist."

Blogger Matthew Yglesias comments: "Talk about moral equivalence! Suppose Hersh decides to hijack an airplane and crash it into the Pentagon -- what are we going to say about him them?"

Here's the article that made Perle mad. Be careful when you click through: It might explode!

Comments

Matt|3.10.03 @ 4:57AM|#

If Perle had his way, he'd probably lock Hersch up for being the closest thing American journalism has to an enemy combatant.

Lefty|3.10.03 @ 5:29AM|#

I once tried to do some business with the government of Puerto Rico, assisted by a local "don" named Chiqui. When I expressed astonishment at the outright corruption and payoffs being made Chiqui laughed and said "Lefty, who do you think taught us?"

I think it's significant that Perle did not deny Hersh's assertions. He just called him names.

|3.10.03 @ 5:36AM|#

The money quote here is clearly:

�It was normal for us to see Perle,� Khashoggi told me. �We in the Middle East are accustomed to politicians who use their offices for whatever business they want."

DC|3.10.03 @ 10:02AM|#

This coming from Richard Perle, a man who was caught on a federal wiretap discussing classified information from the National Security Council with the Israeli Embassy and who in the 1980s was taking substantial payments from an Israeli weapons manufacturer.

Sandy|3.10.03 @ 11:54AM|#

Is this the same Hersh who was trying to sell ABC forged Marilyn Monroe docs (ok, a documentary based around them, a la Al Capone's vault) and wrote a whole book claiming that the Sovs could not have possibly known that KAL 007 wasn't an invading US spy plane?

I mean, I'm sure Mr. Perle has done many things that are very sausage-like if examined closely, but "one of the best political reporters working today"? Quick, somebody let Geraldo know he's almost got that White House Correspondent gig...

Javier|3.11.03 @ 1:18AM|#

Sandy: Yes, I certainly would urge Moran to step down. But what in hell does he have to do with Perle and Hersh?

Lefty|3.11.03 @ 2:04AM|#

Perle's not alone in bellying up to the trough. The entire 911 aftermath has been a huge feeding frenzy of every finance, defense, security, oil, electronics and airline company hustling for contacts in the Federal Government.

There is billions to be had in the aftermath of WTC and, rest assured, the sharks are circling.

Kevin Carson|3.11.03 @ 2:29AM|#

My first memorable to Perle since his Reagan admin "Prince of Darkness" days was during a C-SPAN call-in appearance in the fall of 2001. He told a caller he should be "grateful" to the U.S. for "allowing" him the freedom to criticize it. Reminded me of Janet Reno's self-congratulatory remarks that the U.S. government "gives" its citizens more liberty than any other government in the world.

Our liberties don't exist today because of all the folks who sat around in the past being "grateful" for the freedoms they were already "allowed" to have. Every liberty we have that sets us above the status of a slave to our employer or the state was won for us by hell-raisers with "bad attitudes" toward authority, who were willing to say "Hell NO!" and resist. American liberties weren't granted by a benevolent U.S. government. They were forced on it from outside by Americans who drew a line in the sand and enforced limits on the state.

Unfortunately, as Goering said, in wartime the state finds it much easier to lead the populace around by the nose by wrapping itself in the flag and using the magic words "national security." The public feels a "patriotic" obligation to be gullible at the very time it most needs to be vigilant. Perhaps that's why the state finds it so useful to get involved in constant wars.

David F|3.11.03 @ 3:48AM|#

hey J rockets:

one thing that resonated particularly well was about the "love it or leave it" types. we get these people, both left and right, who are so blinded by zeal that they put philosophy before facts. either the "freedom fries, freedom toast, and salad with freedom dressing! voila!", or the "womyn" spelling -- the strict canon of belief must be followed lest you be branded a heretic!

remember when people were wetting the bed over the militia-types, the use of oklahoma city to push through every sort of special-interest bill was frightening. now it looks the same.

if anybody remembers "the manchurian candidate", how the Senator commented, "one of your mother's more endearing characteristics is to brand anybody who disagrees with her a communist"...

now it's terrorist. in college it was "intolerant"... back in the day it was communist.

sigh.
drf

JDM|3.11.03 @ 9:12AM|#

joe,

I'm not saying it was a verbal slip. Just that to say that Perle is claiming moral equivalence between a journalist and a terrorist is either stupid or dishonest.

Javier|3.11.03 @ 10:09AM|#

Hersh's competence or incompetence as a journalist is irrelevant. Anyone who would compare the writing of a magazine article to terrorism is astonishingly ignorant of what freedom really means and what this country really stands for. Note to Perle: There are many, many countries in this world that actually do treat free speech as a terrorist crime. You're welcome to move to any of them whenever you wish.

Sandy|3.11.03 @ 10:27AM|#

Hersh's competence as a journalist is in question when Mr. Walker refers to him as "one of the best political reporters working today." If you re-read my post, you'll find out that's what I was objecting to.

You may now carry on ritually denouncing Perle. I'm sure we can now bring him up before the Hague. I assume you'll join in the call for Jim Moran to step down? After all, stupid comments make the credibility of charges against them irrelevant.

Johnny Rockets|3.11.03 @ 10:37AM|#

No, Perle's not going to move to any of those countries that treat free speech as a terrorist act -- instead, he and the rest of his cronies are going to work to turn America into one of those countries. Particularly Ashcroft.

And I've noticed that a lot of the people who scream the word "freedom" the loudest also tend to be the most ignorant of freedom really means and what this country really stands for. The "love America or leave it" types who scream the loudest about America and "freedom" -- people like Sean "Let Freedom Ring" Hannity, for example, or the restaurant owner serving "freedom fries" -- would have been the ones turning in Jews if they'd been born in Nazi Germany instead of America. Or if they'd been born as Hutus in Rwanda, they would have led the slaughter of Tutsis.

Or, even more to the point, if they'd been alive in 1776 instead of today, they would have been supporting the King of England instead of the American founding fathers.

JDM|3.11.03 @ 10:48AM|#

Let's take one comment of Perle's completely out of context and pretend he's actually making an honest intellectual comparison between smear journalism and terrorism. That'll be useful.

I read that article, and I don't see the point. Whether or not Perle has set himself up to make money off of the war on terrorism, or the war on Iraq, is meaningless. As a private citizen, he's been asked to be part of the defense advisory board. What do you think a guy like that does in the private sector?

Tell me again, why are libertarians against campaign finance law?

JDM|3.11.03 @ 10:51AM|#

Rockets,

So then there is no difference between joining a satanic cult that ritually slaughters children, and joining say... the Mormons?

|3.11.03 @ 11:12AM|#

So, JDM, I'm supposed to believe that Perle's selection of the word terrorist - coming from a staunch supporter of Israel, one of the most hawkish of the Iraq hawks, a member of the administration that pushed through the USA Patriot Act, and the chair of the Defense Policy Board - was just a verbal slip, and doesn't carry any greater meaning? It used to be "communist," "fellow traveler," or "traitor." Now, apparently, people who make trouble for conseratives are to be denounced at terrorists.

fyodor|3.11.03 @ 11:50AM|#

Yes, we all have freedom of speech in this country, which means that Perle can say whatever he wants to without going to jail, and we in turn can say whatever we want about what he said, too. If it were a punk rocker describing someone he didn't like as a terrorist, I'd laugh. Since it's a powerful citizen in an advisory position with the military, I'm raising my eyebrow and keeping an eye on the fella. And I don't mind people calling him on the outrageousness of his comparison.

But Johnny Rockets, while you may possibly have a point, I think you'd be best off pointing out actual hypocrisy in what real people are saying today rather than make hypothetical claims of what their kind supposedly *would* have said or done in situations in the past. Who the hell knows what they would have done?? We could all play that game and it won't get us anywhere. And if you can't find any real hypocrisy in the here and now, I'd suggest you bite your keying finger till you really do find it. Thanks.

|3.12.03 @ 9:23AM|#

JDM,

I don't think he's claiming moral equivalence. I think he's using the most emotionally charged word in his vocabulary in order to smear someone who made him look bad. And I think it's irresponsible and sleazy to throw words like that around as a way to cover your ass.

JDM|3.12.03 @ 10:50AM|#

joe,

I didn't say you did. Matthew Yglesias and Jesse Walker were making that rather weak claim.

packard aaron|9.10.04 @ 12:03AM|#

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 82.146.43.155
URL: http://www.debt-consolidation-low-rates.biz
DATE: 02/27/2004 10:59:30
To be poor without bitterness is easy; to be rich without arrogance is hard.